Title

Author(s)

Document Type

Working Paper

Date of this Version

1994

DOI

10.2139/ssrn.634127

Abstract

Romer (1993) suggests that universities should undertake experiments that would test the value of mandatory attendance for economics courses. He presents evidence showing that those who attended his classes received higher grades on his exams and concluded that "an important part of the relationship [to the course grade] reflects a genuine effect of attendance." This conclusion is likely to be welcomed by some economics professors.

In this note, I address two issues. First, what does prior research imply about a relationship between attendance and learning? Second, does Romer's own evidence support his conclusion that mandatory attendance is beneficial?